I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the American historical record has always been ``the worse the recession, the stronger the recovery.'' However, although…
I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, the American historical record has always been ``the worse the recession, the stronger the recovery.'' However, although the National Bureau of Economic Research states the recession ended 5 years ago, we can agree the recovery has been anything but strong.
Facts are something this administration fights with vehement opposition. Nevertheless, the simple fact is this is the slowest ``recovery'' our country has witnessed since the Truman Presidency.
After the deep recession that began in December of 2007, employment has risen sluggishly, at best, and has risen much more slowly than in the last four recoveries, for certain. According to the CBO, employment at the end of 2013 was about 6 million jobs short of where it would be if the unemployment rate had returned to its pre-recession level.
This is why I have introduced H.R. 2641, the Responsibly and Professionally Invigorating Development Act of 2013, also known as the RAPID Act.
The RAPID Act creates a streamlined Federal environmental review and permitting process that establishes transparency and certainty for job creators. Furthermore, this bill would empower lead agencies to manage environmental reviews from start to finish, as well as establish time constraints on the review process and period in which a claim can be filed.
A recent study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce identified 351 State- level projects that, if approved for construction, could have created 1.9 million jobs annually during the projected 7 years of construction. While these numbers help put the issue in perspective, I don't need to see a study to know that bureaucracy is holding up projects and preventing job growth. I see it every day in my district.
For example, one of my constituents, PPL Corporation, filed an application with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license to build and operate a state-of-the-art nuclear plant near the company's existing two-unit Susquehanna nuclear power plant. The plant would produce 1,600 megawatts of electricity, enough to power more than 1 million homes. PPL predicted this one project would create 400 construction jobs and 400 permanent jobs.
In addition, early estimates by PPL were that the project would cost $15 billion to construct. These estimates include escalation, financing costs, initial nuclear fuel, and contingencies and reserves.
Imagine for a moment, if you will, the positive impact of a $15 billion investment in my district in Pennsylvania, the 10th Congressional District.
However, Washington bureaucrats have prevented this project from creating jobs, and it has yet to break ground. Six years after the application was first filed in 2008, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission claims they are still reviewing the company's request for a combined operating license. If these individuals that are reviewing this after 6 years were working in private industry, they would have been fired in the first year. In fact, PPL says, realistically, a final decision on the project is still several years away.
This is ridiculous.
Let me be clear. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 serves worthy goals, which should be preserved. I live out in the country. I get my water from a well. I love to see the deer and the bear come through my land. I raised my children there. If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle think that I would do anything to hurt my children, whether it is water, air, or the environment in general, they really should think again.
Federal agencies should be able to evaluate new projects to ensure that they don't pose a threat to the environment or to the public. However, over time, NEPA regulations have turned into an outdated, burdensome, and convoluted Federal permitting process that must be reined in.
The good news is that a bipartisan consensus exists on the need to reform the permitting process. In fact, the administration, the President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, and legislation adopted by a strong bipartisan majority in the 109th and 112th Congresses all recognize that an overly burdensome and lengthy environmental review and permitting process undermines economic growth.
The time for these reforms is now, because Americans are ready to get back to work. The RAPID Act of 2013 will remove the red tape and allow job creators to take projects off the drawing board and onto the worksite.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this commonsense reform, and I reserve the balance of my time.
March 5, 2014.
To the Members of the U.S. House of Representatives: The
undersigned groups strongly support H.R. 2641, the
``Responsibly And Professionally Invigorating Development
(RAPID) Act of 2013,'' which would provide a streamlined
process for developers, builders, and designers to obtain
environmental permits and approvals for their projects in a
timely and efficient manner, allowing jobs to be created and
the economy to grow.
Every year that major projects are stalled or cancelled
because of a dysfunctional permitting process and a system
that allows limitless challenges by opponents of development,
millions of jobs are not created. For example, 351 stalled
energy projects reviewed in one 2010 study (Project No
Project) had a total economic value of over $1 trillion and
represented 1.9 American jobs not created. Project No Project
showed that in the energy sector alone, one year of delay
translates into millions of jobs not created.
The Responsibly And Professionally Invigorating Development
Act of 2013 would improve the environmental review and
permitting process by:
Coordinating responsibilities among multiple agencies
involved in environmental reviews to ensure that ``the trains
run on time;''
Providing for concurrent reviews by agencies, rather than
serial reviews;
Allowing state-level environmental reviews to be used where
the state has done a competent job, thereby avoiding needless
duplication of state work by federal reviewers;
Requiring that agencies involve themselves in the process
early and comment early, avoiding eleventh-hour objections
that can restart the entire review timetable;
Establishing a reasonable process for determining the scope
of project alternatives, so that the environmental review
does not devolve into an endless quest to evaluate infeasible
alternatives;
Consolidating the process into a single Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) and single Environmental Assessment
(EA) for a project, except as otherwise provided by law;
Imposing reasonable fixed deadlines for completion of an
EIS or EA; and
Reducing the statute of limitations to challenge a final
EIS or EA from six years to 180 days.
The RAPID Act is a practical, industry-wide approach that
builds on successful provisions for environmental review
management found in the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century Act (MAP-21), Section 6002 of the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Act: A Legacy for Users
(SAFETEA-LU), and Section 1609 of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act. The RAPID Act also embodies the procedural
improvements to ``cut red tape'' as called for by the Obama
administration, including, most recently, in his January 28,
2014, State of the Union Address.
The RAPID Act addresses the problem far too many shovel-
ready projects face today: lengthy project delays from
endless environmental reviews and challenges result in lost
opportunities to create jobs and grow the economy. Every year
of delay results in millions of jobs not created. The
creation of millions of jobs is worth ensuring that our
governinent works faster and more efficiently.
The undersigned groups strongly support H.R. 2641. The
RAPID Act would be the strong action needed to speed up the
permitting process and let important projects move forward,
allowing millions of workers to get back to work. We urge you
to support this important bill.
Sincerely,
American Architectural Manufacturers Association, American
Bakers Association, American Chemistry Council, American
Coating Association, American Concrete Pressure Pipe
Association, American Council of Engineering Companies,
American Forest & Paper Association, American Foundry
Society, American Highway Users Alliance, American Iron and
Steel Institute, American Petroleum Institute, American
Rental Association, American Road & Transportation Builders
Association.
American Supply Association, Associated Builders &
Contractors, Associated Builders & Contractors--Rhode Island
Chapter, Associated Equipment Distributors, Associated
General Contractors, Associated Wire Rope Fabricators,
Association of American Railroads, Association of Equipment
Manufacturers, Construction Industry Round Table, Edison
Electric Institute, Electronic Security Association, Forging
Industry Association, Foundry Association of Michigan,
Independent Electrical Contractors, Industrial Energy
Consumers of America, Industrial Fasteners Institute,
Industrial Minerals Association--North America, Metals
Service Center Institute.
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association, National
Association of Electrical Distributors, National Association
of Home Builders, National Association of Manufacturers,
National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, National
Black Chamber of Commerce, National Electrical Manufacturers
Association, National Federation of Independent Business,
National Industrial Sand Association, National Mining
Association, National Oilseed Processors Association,
National Ready Mixed Concrete Association, National Roofing
Contractors Association, National Shippers Strategic
Transportation Council.
National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association, Non-Ferrous
Founders' Society, North American Equipment Dealers
Association, Nuclear Energy Institute, Ohio Cast Metals
Association, Pacific-West Fastener Association, Pennsylvania
Foundry Association, Petroleum Marketers Association of
America, Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, South
Carolina Timber Producers Association, Texas Cast Metals
Association, Textile Rental Services Association, U.S.
Chamber of Commerce, Washington Retail Association, Wisconsin
Cast Metals Association, Wisconsin Grocers Association.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).
Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
It is almost amusing to hear my colleagues from the other side say how much they want to work together, how much they want to get this country moving, how much they want to create jobs.
Since I have been here--this is my second term, fourth year--I have seen virtually no cooperation from the other side in creating jobs. They get up, and they give a good speech about names, but there is no substance to it. There is no substance to it at all.
As a matter of fact, this is a bipartisan piece of legislation. Both sides support this.
You know, my colleagues had control of the House prior to the Republicans controlling it 4 years ago. They touched none of these issues.
And I want to ask the American people--not my colleagues on the other side of the aisle--how has this Federal regulation system been going over the last 5 years?
Virtually no jobs created, agencies stopping everything they can under this administration, but yet they stand up and give a good speech about cooperation. I have rarely seen it here.
I have seen obstructionists because it is a power play. You know, when someone comes up with a good idea--and I blame both sides over the years for this--it is not what is in the best interests of the American people. It is who is in power that wants to keep it and who is not in power that wants to take it away. And you know something? The American people are completely forgotten about.
Well, one of the reasons--the main reason I came to Washington was to work for the American people, not to preserve my job, not to keep power, not to take power; but it was to do what is right. And if you would listen to what has taken place in some of the hearings over the past 3.5 years that I have been involved in, you don't hear cooperation. You don't hear it at all.
So now, I ask my colleagues on the other side: How is that Federal system going? How is that permitting system going--that regulating system going?
It is not going well at all. Just ask industry how much it has been slowed down because of regulation, and thousands and thousands of more regulations have been implemented by this administration than ever before. So let's get serious, okay? Let's be honest with the American people about what this is about.
The Federal government doesn't create jobs. Private sector creates jobs. The responsibility of the Federal Government is to remove obstacles that allow private industry to do what they do best--better than the Federal Government.
And as I said before, I have met a lot of good people here in Congress. I have met a lot of good people in the Federal system. But there is a fair number of people in the Federal system, in these agencies, that go out and say ``no,'' just for the sake of saying ``no,'' that if they had to go to work in private industry and operated under the same premise that they did in the Federal Government, they would be fired.
It is about time we start standing up for the American people and create jobs; and I hear from this administration constantly, but there are always obstacles. There are 40-some pieces of legislation sitting on Harry Reid's desk, the leader of the Senate, the Democrat who won't even bring it to the floor for a vote.
That is a disgrace. Bring it to the floor for a vote. Vote it up or down, but let the American people know what is being voted on; and it should be brought to the floor, so they know what is going on here.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time. I have the right to close, so I will reserve the balance of my time.
I yield myself the remainder of the time, Mr. Chairman.
You know, Mr. Chairman, to bring about real and durable job recovery, there can be only one conclusion about what the House can do today, and it should vote to pass the RAPID Act.
My friend on the other side talks about the post office, and I support them. My mother worked for the post office. But you know something? The post office is self-funded, okay?
Where is the $1 trillion that this administration put into the so- called stimulus? It did nothing. It wasn't applied properly. It wasn't utilized.
This doesn't cut regulations, this legislation. It doesn't cut regulations. It cuts making a decision from 15 years down to 4.5 years. Just think in our households, how many of us would have delayed by years making decisions, were it be.
This is bipartisan legislation that would transform into immediate action
the recommendations of the President's Jobs Council, the exhortations of Vice President Biden, and the promises President Obama made.
The President's Jobs Council stated that our system for permitting and approving job-creating projects leads to delays and litigation and recommended in 2011 that the process be streamlined. The RAPID Act does that.
President Obama, in his 2014 State of the Union Address, promised action to slash bureaucracy and streamline the permitting process, so we can get more construction workers on the job as fast as possible. The RAPID Act delivers that.
Let's come together, Republicans and Democrats, for the hardworking Americans desperate for new and high-paying jobs. The RAPID Act allows that to happen.
On average, it takes the Federal Government 10 to 15 years to approve permitting. If private industry operated in such an irresponsible manner, it would be bankrupt.
Instead of talking the talk, it is time to walk the walk and pass this legislation that will create excellent-paying jobs.
My legislation reduces permitting down to 4.5 years, and it doesn't take any authority away. It appoints a single entity, a Federal agency that has a major hand in this for oversight.
And if my colleagues are saying: well, it is not the Federal Government, it is the State and local governments.
Then that agency can light the fire under that local or State government and tell them: you must get your approvals in or, by a certain time, your opportunity to do that will be waived.
So still, in an effort to reach across the aisle and work with my colleagues and create hundreds of thousands of jobs, let's cut the red tape. Ask the people in my district about red tape--those from the VA, those from Social Security--what they have to go through with agencies--those from EPA, those from OSHA. It is a disaster.
So let's come together, Republicans and Democrats, for the hardworking Americans. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Chair, with all due respect to my colleague with whom we have worked closely on several matters on several committees, Mr. Chairman, the American people desperately need new jobs. Just this week, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that America's labor force participation rate is at a 35-year low. Over 92 million Americans who could work are outside of the workforce. That is more than the population of all but 14 of the world's 228 countries--and more than every country in the Western Hemisphere but Brazil and Mexico.
We face this historically low rate not because Americans don't want to work, but because so many Americans have despaired of any hope of finding a new full-time job and have abandoned the workforce. The RAPID Act offers strong help to reverse this tragedy, restore hope, and produce millions of new jobs.
We must pass the bill, not weaken it, to provide these new, high-wage jobs. But the gentlelady's amendment would weaken the bill in one of the worst possible ways. It would remove the clear consequence in the bill for agencies
that refuse to follow the bill's deadlines. That consequence is to deem permits approved if agencies refuse to approve or deny them within those deadlines.
Mr. Chairman, the bill provides 4\1/2\ years for agencies to complete their environmental reviews for new permit applications and reasonable additional time for agencies to wrap up final permit approvals or denials after that. 4\1/2\ years is more time than it took the United States to fight and win World War II.
If agencies can't wrap up their environmental reviews in that much time and then meet the bill's remaining deadlines, there is something terribly wrong with the agencies. The prospect of facing a default approval at the end of the substantial time the bill grants is an eminently responsible, reasonable way to assure that agencies will conduct full reviews and wrap their work up in time to make up-or-down decisions on their own.
I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment, and, reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I am just going to close on this thought here. My colleague on the other side says that 4\1/2\ years is just simply not enough time to go through the permitting and licensing project. Just think about this: ask the people in the private sector when you see buildings going up, before they are going up when there is a statement on the land where the building is going to go up as to this project is going to take place in so much time, ask those people, get information to see how long it takes the private sector to do the same thing that the Federal Government is supposed to be doing. At most, a couple of years--not 10 years, not 12 years, not 15 years. Private industry can have this done in a couple of years with all the research, with all the permitting, with all the licensing, and with all the hearings.
I think one of my colleagues said this blocks out the public from hearing or making any statements. That is simply
not true. That is absolutely not true. The public still has the time and can do that.
So with that, I oppose my good friend's amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, just to highlight some construction that has taken place in the past before we had all this regulation: San Francisco Bay Bridge construction started July 9, 1933, and the bridge opened up on November 12, 1936. Chesapeake Bay Bridge construction started in January of 1949 and the
bridge opened up July 30, 1952. Empire State Building construction started January 22, 1930, and the building opened up May 1, 1931. The Chrysler Building construction began in 1926 and was completed in 1930. One of my favorites: the new Yankee Stadium groundbreaking was in August of 2006; opening day was April of 2009.
There are thousands of comedians out of business. If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would get serious about following the premise that the American people want--less red tape--instead of trying to be funny, we would be in good shape.